I study the risks of digital tech, especially privacy. So people are surprised to hear that I’m optimistic about tech’s long term societal impact. But without optimism and the belief that you can create change with research & advocacy, you burn out too soon in this line of work.
9 years ago I was on the academic job market. The majority of professors I met asked why I chose to work on privacy since—as we all know—privacy is dead because of the Internet and it's pointless to fight it. (Computer scientists tend to be technological determinists, who knew?!)
At fist I didn't expect that "why does your research field exist?" would be serious, recurring question. Gradually I came up with a pitch that at least got interviewers to briefly suspend privacy skepticism and hear about my research. (That pitch is a story for another day.)
"Why does your field exist?" is a question every scholar should be prepared to answer. Even if you're never asked that question, it's a useful kind of reflection to engage in once in a while.
I'm glad I persevered through my peers' skepticism and continued working on privacy. I couldn't have known that the pendulum would start to swing back the very next year after my job interviews due to the Snowden leaks (and, later, Cambridge Analytica).
<end>
<end>
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
